Windows 8 will include its own built-in antivirus software. But if a user installs antivirus software from McAfee, Symantec, AVG, or any other vendor, Windows 8's own protection will turn itself off and defer entirely to the third-party product. Microsoft's software will spring to life only if there's no third-party malware protection at all or if the third-party software is installed but has no up-to-date signatures.

Representatives from McAfee spoke to Computerworld to explain the behavior. While this might seem like a concession from Microsoft to the third-party antivirus vendors, McAfee says it isn't. Rather, it's designed to keep Windows OEMs happy.

OEMs have long bundled third-party antivirus software with their systems, because they receive kickbacks from the antivirus vendors whenever users buy subscriptions to the software. Windows 8's built-in antivirus software threatened this revenue stream; if Windows offers to perform antivirus functionality all by itself, there's no reason to buy a subscription.

Windows 8 will warn users when their antivirus software is out-of-date and provide them information on how to renew their subscription. After 15 days of warnings, it will also offer to install Microsoft's own Windows Defender. This combines the anti-spyware properties of Windows Defender and the antivirus capabilities of Microsoft Security Essentials.

Our advice would be to blow away the bloatware and skip the trials. Head straight for Microsoft's software. It's not perfect—no antivirus software is—but it keeps a low profile and will protect against all the mainstream malware threats.

When I buy a car it comes with an engine, even though there are plenty of other engine manufacturers out there.Why are browsers or anti-virus programs any different?

Because the OEMs are getting kickbacks from the crapware AV companies to bundle their crap on the computer and bilk unsuspecting users out of money. Said companies don't really care how much damage it does to the user experience.

This whole mess is one of the times that it really pays to buy from an independent shop. It costs more, but the headaches are so greatly reduced as compared to the big OEM crapware laden systems that it's well worth it. (It's also a case where Apple's tyrannical iron fisted control over their platform is a positive, because nobody can screw up a Mac the way HP can screw up a new PC.)

The user experience really does suffer when OEMs pre-install other AVs. The AV vendor model is to get pre-installed with a 30 or 90 day trial and then start nagging the user to pay for extensions. Sure, there's money in it for the OEMs, and sure they would be unhappy. But sometimes you (Microsoft in this case) just need to be the user's advocate, do the right thing for them, and figure out how to appease their partners later.

This whole mess is one of the times that it really pays to buy from an independent shop. It costs more, but the headaches are so greatly reduced as compared to the big OEM crapware laden systems that it's well worth it. (It's also a case where Apple's tyrannical iron fisted control over their platform is a positive, because nobody can screw up a Mac the way HP can screw up a new PC.)

Independent shops have mostly non-existent warranties, terrible prices, and poorly-designed hardware. I'll take the crapware, thank you. I can re-image a machine in 40 minutes.

After using the Win8 release preview and Defender, I did notice some differences between it and MSE. The right-click context menu to scan an individual item / folder is gone. Maybe it's an anachronism to be scanning things if it's always running in the background, but I do like manually scanning things I download.

The other thing is that the definitions update for Defender is now tied to Windows Update - it follows whatever selection you have there. I prefer to leave Windows Update remind me but not automatically update, whereas I liked MSE to automatically update definitions every night. Now to get Defender to update nightly I have to set Windows Update to automatically update.

Not a big fan of either of these changes, though the product still beats anything else out there.

When I buy a car it comes with an engine, even though there are plenty of other engine manufacturers out there.Why are browsers or anti-virus programs any different?

Because the OEMs are getting kickbacks from the crapware AV companies to bundle their crap on the computer and bilk unsuspecting users out of money. Said companies don't really care how much damage it does to the user experience.

This whole mess is one of the times that it really pays to buy from an independent shop. It costs more, but the headaches are so greatly reduced as compared to the big OEM crapware laden systems that it's well worth it. (It's also a case where Apple's tyrannical iron fisted control over their platform is a positive, because nobody can screw up a Mac the way HP can screw up a new PC.)

I've dropped my Norton IS 2012 on the Release Preview and I have to say, I haven't had any problems thus far. One thing that I LOVE about Windows Defender is that it doesn't automatically remove things without my permission like NIS2012 did.

That was a pain when I downloaded a game trainer or game crack (after buying the game legally, before someone busts my chops) and it tried to remove those automatically, thereby making me go into the Quarantine menu to restore it.

I've also noticed a SLIGHT speed increase without NIS, especially when playing graphics-intensive games.

I've dropped my Norton IS 2012 on the Release Preview and I have to say, I haven't had any problems thus far. One thing that I LOVE about Windows Defender is that it doesn't automatically remove things without my permission like NIS2012 did.

That was a pain when I downloaded a game trainer or game crack (after buying the game legally, before someone busts my chops) and it tried to remove those automatically, thereby making me go into the Quarantine menu to restore it.

I've also noticed a SLIGHT speed increase without NIS, especially when playing graphics-intensive games.

It's always great removing Norton and replacing with MSE.My girlfriend's dad's Norton sub expired. He was skepetical of replacing it with MSE, but after a reboot after I installed MSE+some other missing Windows updates, MSE popped up on some random piece of adware that was in the startup folder that Norton left alone. He said one word to me: "Sold"

I love MSE and use it and recommend it, but I also am a little nervious that a virus won't be able to just go in and disable it after it installs itself as an AV product. This happens a lot now on XP through Win7 with all these fake AV software malware that is probably the most common malware to see these days. I have seen this malware disable MSE, Windows Update, and the security center services, then make itself out to be the systems protection and try to extort personal data or credit card info from the user. It sets registry keys in the imagefileexecution area to prevent valid security services from running, and the virus does its thing. I just hope that the built in stuff is resilient against being disabled by any old app that claims to be 3rd party AV software. Not sure how to police that while being fair to the smaller AV firms (as I know it won' tbe a problem for the big players to be verified). Security should not be something you have to buy for the PC, security should be something you buy when you pay for the OS, so I like this approach from MS. Please just do it right.

So much for putting the customer first, eh Microsoft? Personally I'm a big fan of MSE and OEM's should just suck it up. Let end-users install whatever product they want, but if they don't want to install another product, they should expect great protection from MSE, not some trialware garbage from the OEM.

again I will say to use revo uninstall to get rid of bloatware rather than go through the procedures you suggested. One, some of the preinstalled software might actually be useful. Two, it may be harder than you expect to actually download the drivers you need should you do a clean install.

This whole mess is one of the times that it really pays to buy from an independent shop. It costs more, but the headaches are so greatly reduced as compared to the big OEM crapware laden systems that it's well worth it. (It's also a case where Apple's tyrannical iron fisted control over their platform is a positive, because nobody can screw up a Mac the way HP can screw up a new PC.)

Independent shops have mostly non-existent warranties, terrible prices, and poorly-designed hardware. I'll take the crapware, thank you. I can re-image a machine in 40 minutes.

We must not be shopping at the same places then, because the only crap hardware I've ever gotten came from the big boys cutting corners. I swear HP has the most poorly designed cases on the planet.

Also, re-imaging a new computer shouldn't be required to make it not suck. Not suck should be the default state.

OEMs have long bundled third-party antivirus software with their systems, because they receive kickbacks from the antivirus vendors whenever users buy subscriptions to the software.

and this is one issue working against big name OEMs preinstalling Linux on their products, or brick and mortar stores stocking them on shelves. In the same way that stores earn more on the cables than the TV, they earn more on the shrink wrapped box of software than the PC.

So much for putting the customer first, eh Microsoft? Personally I'm a big fan of MSE and OEM's should just suck it up. Let end-users install whatever product they want, but if they don't want to install another product, they should expect great protection from MSE, not some trialware garbage from the OEM.

I believe you're conflating Micrsofts' customers with end-users. Since OEMs are in fact Microsoft's customers, they are indeed putting their customers first. In this case, in my opinion they are also putting end-users first, allowing them to use whichever anti-malware products they choose, while providing a safety net in case the user either doesn't know how to install anti-malware, or their subscription lapses.

If the other vendors would quit making their software so damn bloated, it might not matter so much. As it is, in my opinion, MSE is the only viable anti-virus product on the market. That it's free isn't even relevant - it's the best combination of effectiveness, integration, and performance; at least for consumer products.

Symantec Endpoint Protection seems to work really well in the corporate environment. I can't speak to the other vendors' corporate offerings though; as that's the only one I've used.

MSE was one of the smarter moves M$ has done. In fact, having recently purchased a 2nd-gen i3 Core HP laptop for < $399, I continue to be thoroughly pleased with Win7, I can't see ever spending $$$ on a sexy Mac laptop. Between Ubuntu and windows 7/8, life is pretty darn good. It helps to have some tech sense about you (like setting up a standard account, keeping things up to date, etc...), but MS has a damn solid product.

I love MSE and use it and recommend it, but I also am a little nervious that a virus won't be able to just go in and disable it after it installs itself as an AV product. This happens a lot now on XP through Win7 with all these fake AV software malware that is probably the most common malware to see these days. I have seen this malware disable MSE, Windows Update, and the security center services, then make itself out to be the systems protection and try to extort personal data or credit card info from the user. It sets registry keys in the imagefileexecution area to prevent valid security services from running, and the virus does its thing. I just hope that the built in stuff is resilient against being disabled by any old app that claims to be 3rd party AV software. Not sure how to police that while being fair to the smaller AV firms (as I know it won' tbe a problem for the big players to be verified). Security should not be something you have to buy for the PC, security should be something you buy when you pay for the OS, so I like this approach from MS. Please just do it right.

That's why users should be on non-admin accounts and not have passwords for UAC.

When I buy a car it comes with an engine, even though there are plenty of other engine manufacturers out there.Why are browsers or anti-virus programs any different?

Because the OEMs are getting kickbacks from the crapware AV companies to bundle their crap on the computer and bilk unsuspecting users out of money. Said companies don't really care how much damage it does to the user experience.

This whole mess is one of the times that it really pays to buy from an independent shop. It costs more, but the headaches are so greatly reduced as compared to the big OEM crapware laden systems that it's well worth it. (It's also a case where Apple's tyrannical iron fisted control over their platform is a positive, because nobody can screw up a Mac the way HP can screw up a new PC.)

I love MSE and use it and recommend it, but I also am a little nervious that a virus won't be able to just go in and disable it after it installs itself as an AV product. This happens a lot now on XP through Win7 with all these fake AV software malware that is probably the most common malware to see these days. I have seen this malware disable MSE, Windows Update, and the security center services, then make itself out to be the systems protection and try to extort personal data or credit card info from the user. It sets registry keys in the imagefileexecution area to prevent valid security services from running, and the virus does its thing. I just hope that the built in stuff is resilient against being disabled by any old app that claims to be 3rd party AV software. Not sure how to police that while being fair to the smaller AV firms (as I know it won' tbe a problem for the big players to be verified). Security should not be something you have to buy for the PC, security should be something you buy when you pay for the OS, so I like this approach from MS. Please just do it right.

That's why users should be on non-admin accounts and not have passwords for UAC.

This x1000. I don't know why people still insist on running as root and at the same time expect things to be rosy security-wise. The only systems I've found these infections on were running in admin.